From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Oct 20 18:24:53 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA06485 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 18:24:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from fly.HiWAAY.net (root@fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA06474 for ; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 18:24:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dkelly@nospam.hiwaay.net) Received: from nospam.hiwaay.net (tnt2-162.HiWAAY.net [208.147.148.162]) by fly.HiWAAY.net (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id UAA20202; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:24:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: from nospam.hiwaay.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nospam.hiwaay.net (8.8.7/8.8.4) with ESMTP id UAA14405; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:24:37 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199710210124.UAA14405@nospam.hiwaay.net> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: Joe McGuckin cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG From: dkelly@hiwaay.net Subject: Re: 2.2.2-RELEASE '875 SCSI won't negotiage In-reply-to: Message from Joe McGuckin of "Mon, 20 Oct 1997 15:06:28 PDT." <199710202206.PAA17351@monk.via.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 20 Oct 1997 20:24:34 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Joe McGuckin writes: > > (ncr0:0:0): "QUANTUM XP32275W LXY4" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 > sd0(ncr0:0:0): Direct-Access > sd0(ncr0:0:0): WIDE SCSI (16 bit) enabled > sd0(ncr0:0:0): 20.0 MB/s (100 ns, offset 16) > > > Shouldn't this report back 40.0 MB/s for fast wide ultra ? Probably should. But it might not really be up to 40 MB/sec. The MB/sec and ns numbers agree. I got this the other day on my new Asus SC875 and 9G IBM UW drive: ncr0 rev 3 int a irq 11 on pci0:11 ncr0 waiting for scsi devices to settle (ncr0:0:0): WIDE SCSI (16 bit) enabled(ncr0:0:0): 10.0 MB/s (200 ns, offset 15) (ncr0:0:0): "IBM OEM DCHS09W 2222" type 0 fixed SCSI 2 sd1(ncr0:0:0): Direct-Access sd1(ncr0:0:0): WIDE SCSI (16 bit) enabled sd1(ncr0:0:0): 20.0 MB/s (100 ns, offset 15) 8689MB (17796077 512 byte sectors) Am mildly concerned about the 10.0 MB/s message that starts it off. And I'm thinking about the whole issue because I'm not certian my performance is up to snuff. Using bonnie: IBM OEM DCHS09W on Asus SC875, new & empty 2.4G filesystem at end of disk: -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 100 3972 41.8 3986 14.6 2234 7.5 6700 76.3 8228 16.4 108.4 2.6 ^^^^ this seems low SEAGATE ST32550N on Adaptec 2940 (AIC-7870) old 86% full 1.8G fs -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 100 3980 43.2 4402 13.9 1774 5.0 4260 48.3 3759 5.7 71.5 1.5 System is an Asus P6NP5 PPro-166/512k 32M RAM. # scsi -f /dev/rsd1c -m 8 -P 3 WCE: 0 MF: 0 RCD: 0 Demand Retention Priority: 1 Write Retention Priority: 1 Disable Pre-fetch Transfer Length: 65535 Minimum Pre-fetch: 0 Maximum Pre-fetch: 65535 Maximum Pre-fetch Ceiling: 65535 Observed the Seagate had the WCE set (Write Cache Enable) so I did the same for the IBM. Flipped the WCE bit from 0 to 1 and got this on the IBM (last fs): -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 100 7402 76.5 7927 31.0 2311 7.8 6587 75.2 8207 16.2 110.3 2.5 ^^^^ ^^^^ both of these are *much* better. After enabling the write cache, this drive is comparable to the new Seagate 4.3G Barracuda on an Adaptec 2940AU (AIC-7860) and P-133 I'm playing with at work: -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 100 3653 75.6 8523 36.4 2293 15.9 3595 70.6 9183 38.4 92.2 4.3 It really bugged me that my UW HD on PentiumPro was being beat by a P-133 with narrow SCSI. Then I began to wonder if there was a difference between inner and outer tracks. This fs starts about 200M past block 0, while the above (up 2, the IBM) starts 2.4G from the end of the disk: -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 100 8098 79.7 9385 38.3 2758 9.2 6426 74.0 9772 20.1 111.2 2.5 ...and that's more like it! What really brought all this about was when a dump | restore from old 2.1G Seagate to new 9.1G IBM reported 500k/sec thruput. The IBM fs's were still mounted async as sysinstall left them. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.